just can't feel this show at all. big fan of the comics and i want to like it so much.

about the original source material thing; i'm happy for changes to be made, i think certain changes have been well played out but there are others which i just don't understand. the omission of tyreese, and alan and his wife with the two kids. instead we get tyreese, and then the only other child that carl could interact with is killed. so we get just an annoying kid running around acting terribly.

dale was always a great character in the comics too. i wouldn't mind these characters getting killed off if there was other characters (new or from the source material) that were interesting. does anyone actually care about t-dog and/or that redneck fellow?

Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:21 am

Colin

Re: The Walking Dead

ilovemovies wrote:

I definitely agree with those that say season 2 is better than the season 1. I love season 1, I thought it was great. But season 2 is definitely been even better. The whole Rick/Shane conflict couldn't have been handled better and was executed perfectly. The scene where Rick finally kills Shane was such a powerful scene too.

Uhhhh, spoiler much? I already knew this, and so do most reading this thread probably, but yowza.

Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:12 pm

Colin

Re: The Walking Dead

OtherBen wrote:

dale was always a great character in the comics too. i wouldn't mind these characters getting killed off if there was other characters (new or from the source material) that were interesting. does anyone actually care about t-dog and/or that redneck fellow?

I don't mind the redneck, I think he could be fleshed out even more and become a more three dimensional character. Same goes for t-dog....or they could both get killed off in the next episode.

Either way I'm quite happy at this point with the way things have gone looking back. I'm also very interested to see what they do with some of the characters they haven't explored as much.

I think the ultimate ballsy move would be to have every get killed in the season finale and just end it lol.

Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:16 pm

roastbeef_ajus

Re: The Walking Dead

PeachyPete wrote:

It just doesn't bother me. I think people get emotionally attached to a source material and then get angry when a decision they don't like is made. Then the whole, "it should have been like the book/comic/whatever is being adapted" mindset comes into play. It's a lame way to criticize something you don't like. To me, it's much more interesting to try to figure out why someone would make a change than it is to bash said change simply because it's different than it once was. Not liking how the Sophia plot point was handled is a fine, legit criticism. Not liking it simply because it's different than the source material isn't (which I'm not accusing you of, for the record). If I wanted to see something exactly as it previously was, I would check it out in whatever form it previously was made in.

Take Game of Thrones...Arguably the best show on HBO since the Wire (and Sopranos for the most part). Each season is supposed to be a book of the series (with some extremely devoted fans). Season one was so good that I started reading the books. Now, while they did leave some things out, and had to condense others simply because the length of the book coupled with the fact that they only had 10 episodes to do everything, the season is pretty much just like the first book...which is an amazing accomplishment. A devoted fan expects certain things to play out. Most fans agree that Peter Jackson got LOTR as close to the beloved books as he could given time constraints...yet it was still his interpretation. If one is going to interpret a source material, certain things had better play out like one expects...at least in my eyes.

The one exception I can make off the top of my head is the Watchmen. While I still enjoy the graphic novel better, I can say that the writers did come up with a better solution (in my eyes) than the novel afforded.

The ending. It worked much better in the movie having the world powers unite against Dr. Manhattan than against an alien (like the novel). It was much more grounded within the world Watchmen set up and gave more weight to Dr. Manhattan's decision to still not tell the world of Veidt's secret plot.

Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:46 pm

Ragnarok73

Re: The Walking Dead

roastbeef_ajus wrote:

The one exception I can make off the top of my head is the Watchmen. While I still enjoy the graphic novel better, I can say that the writers did come up with a better solution (in my eyes) than the novel afforded.

The ending. It worked much better in the movie having the world powers unite against Dr. Manhattan than against an alien (like the novel). It was much more grounded within the world Watchmen set up and gave more weight to Dr. Manhattan's decision to still not tell the world of Veidt's secret plot.

Veidt's plan in the original comic hinged greatly in part on the very absurdity of the alien creature he had created. Keep in mind: Veidt wanted to *trick* the world's nations into uniting through fear of something that wasn't actually a threat (re: wasn't actually *real*). Using Dr. Manhattan as this plot device was extremely stupid on the part of the producers/Snyder because he actually had powers that could threaten all life on earth. The last thing you want to do with a being with vast powers and a frail psyche is to seriously antagonize and threaten him.

Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:04 pm

OtherBen

Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:52 amPosts: 50Location: England.

Re: The Walking Dead

roastbeef_ajus wrote:

PeachyPete wrote:

It just doesn't bother me. I think people get emotionally attached to a source material and then get angry when a decision they don't like is made. Then the whole, "it should have been like the book/comic/whatever is being adapted" mindset comes into play. It's a lame way to criticize something you don't like. To me, it's much more interesting to try to figure out why someone would make a change than it is to bash said change simply because it's different than it once was. Not liking how the Sophia plot point was handled is a fine, legit criticism. Not liking it simply because it's different than the source material isn't (which I'm not accusing you of, for the record). If I wanted to see something exactly as it previously was, I would check it out in whatever form it previously was made in.

Take Game of Thrones...Arguably the best show on HBO since the Wire (and Sopranos for the most part). Each season is supposed to be a book of the series (with some extremely devoted fans). Season one was so good that I started reading the books. Now, while they did leave some things out, and had to condense others simply because the length of the book coupled with the fact that they only had 10 episodes to do everything, the season is pretty much just like the first book...which is an amazing accomplishment. A devoted fan expects certain things to play out. Most fans agree that Peter Jackson got LOTR as close to the beloved books as he could given time constraints...yet it was still his interpretation. If one is going to interpret a source material, certain things had better play out like one expects...at least in my eyes.

The one exception I can make off the top of my head is the Watchmen. While I still enjoy the graphic novel better, I can say that the writers did come up with a better solution (in my eyes) than the novel afforded.

The ending. It worked much better in the movie having the world powers unite against Dr. Manhattan than against an alien (like the novel). It was much more grounded within the world Watchmen set up and gave more weight to Dr. Manhattan's decision to still not tell the world of Veidt's secret plot.

not only do i 'kind of' agree with your take on intepretation, i just can't get behind walking dead when it's characters are written so poorly next to a show like game of thrones, which is also fantasy so there's no excuse. certain characters are on screen for less than 3 minutes and i already feel as though i know all about them.

walking dead should just be called walking exposition.

Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:56 am

Blonde Almond

Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:41 pmPosts: 505Location: The Desert

Re: The Walking Dead

Anyone still sticking with this series? Season 3 just started, leading off with maybe the most exciting episode since the pilot. For anyone who bailed during the second season, it might be worth watching at least this newest episode to see if any interest returns.

_________________"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool."Letterboxd Profile

Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:38 am

Ragnarok73

Cinematographer

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pmPosts: 545

Re: The Walking Dead

Blonde Almond wrote:

Anyone still sticking with this series? Season 3 just started, leading off with maybe the most exciting episode since the pilot. For anyone who bailed during the second season, it might be worth watching at least this newest episode to see if any interest returns.

Unless it involves half the surviving characters dying in a massive bloodbath that helps it catch up to the comics, I'm not interested. The producers and their "let's stretch it out to make a buck" strategy for the TV adaptation can go fuck themselves.

_________________"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."

Mon Oct 15, 2012 4:58 pm

PeachyPete

Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pmPosts: 638

Re: The Walking Dead

Ragnarok73 wrote:

Blonde Almond wrote:

Anyone still sticking with this series? Season 3 just started, leading off with maybe the most exciting episode since the pilot. For anyone who bailed during the second season, it might be worth watching at least this newest episode to see if any interest returns.

Unless it involves half the surviving characters dying in a massive bloodbath that helps it catch up to the comics, I'm not interested. The producers and their "let's stretch it out to make a buck" strategy for the TV adaptation can go fuck themselves.

Christ man, we get it. You've only been saying that exact same thing for the past year in this thread. I think your opinion that the plot is being stretched out to make money has been noted. It's kind of weird that you can't just let people who watch and enjoy the show engage in discussion without repeatedly throwing your 2 cents in.

Anyway, I watched the season 3 premiere last night. I had to DVR it Sunday night because we had some friends over who weren't caught up on the series. I thought it was a solid opener. It had a nice blend of action and plot development. The ending was really good and I think it sets the season up well. My only hope is that they don't use the prison setting like they used Hershel's farm last season. We've seen how that plays out, there's no need to rehash it at a different locale.

Tue Oct 16, 2012 8:26 am

Ragnarok73

Cinematographer

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pmPosts: 545

Re: The Walking Dead

PeachyPete wrote:

Christ man, we get it. You've only been saying that exact same thing for the past year in this thread. I think your opinion that the plot is being stretched out to make money has been noted. It's kind of weird that you can't just let people who watch and enjoy the show engage in discussion without repeatedly throwing your 2 cents in.

I envy you, really, because it's clear from reading your comments that you've never read the source material upon which the TV series is based. I wish I hadn't either before I started watching Season 2, because the slow pace wouldn't be nearly as noticeable for me. However, the original comic series set a level of tension that can only exist when the perception that no character is safe is established from the start; this is why I love the Song of Ice and Fire book series (upon which the Game of Thrones series is based) so much.

_________________"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."

Tue Oct 16, 2012 3:26 pm

PeachyPete

Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pmPosts: 638

Re: The Walking Dead

Ragnarok73 wrote:

I envy you, really, because it's clear from reading your comments that you've never read the source material upon which the TV series is based. I wish I hadn't either before I started watching Season 2, because the slow pace wouldn't be nearly as noticeable for me. However, the original comic series set a level of tension that can only exist when the perception that no character is safe is established from the start; this is why I love the Song of Ice and Fire book series (upon which the Game of Thrones series is based) so much.

You're right, I haven't read the source material. I'm judging the show based purely on its own terms. As a show, I enjoy it despite the slow pace of the first half of the second season. It's not a great show by any means, but it's genuinely suspenseful and interesting. I disagree that the show hasn't created a perception that no character is safe. Maybe it's done differently in the comics, but the show's killed off plenty of characters. Aside from Rick, I don't think there's anyone that's completely safe on the show. I have to imagine that's the same in the comics considering he's the main character. Feel free to point out how wrong I am.

As for Game of Thrones, I haven't read that, either. I watched the first season of the show and found it to be decent. People comparing it to The Wire have lost their minds, in my opinion. That show had more merit to it than just about anything I've ever seen. Game of Thrones (at least the show) seems to be a dissection of power and how it can corrupt. That's something we've seen done a million and one times. It doesn't make it a bad show, and it's a well done production, but it's not something that excites me.

Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:48 pm

Ragnarok73

Cinematographer

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pmPosts: 545

Re: The Walking Dead

PeachyPete wrote:

Ragnarok73 wrote:

I envy you, really, because it's clear from reading your comments that you've never read the source material upon which the TV series is based. I wish I hadn't either before I started watching Season 2, because the slow pace wouldn't be nearly as noticeable for me. However, the original comic series set a level of tension that can only exist when the perception that no character is safe is established from the start; this is why I love the Song of Ice and Fire book series (upon which the Game of Thrones series is based) so much.

You're right, I haven't read the source material. I'm judging the show based purely on its own terms. As a show, I enjoy it despite the slow pace of the first half of the second season. It's not a great show by any means, but it's genuinely suspenseful and interesting. I disagree that the show hasn't created a perception that no character is safe. Maybe it's done differently in the comics, but the show's killed off plenty of characters. Aside from Rick, I don't think there's anyone that's completely safe on the show. I have to imagine that's the same in the comics considering he's the main character. Feel free to point out how wrong I am.

I won't mention all of the main characters that have died in the comic series by this point, because there are a ton. I've already mentioned some in this thread in spoiler boxes, and some of them have died past the point that the TV series has adapted from the comics. If you get the chance, read the first couple of graphic novel compilations of the comic series, because you'll get a better understanding of what I'm talking about when I say that the level of tension in the comics is much higher than that of the TV series thus far.

PeachyPete wrote:

As for Game of Thrones, I haven't read that, either. I watched the first season of the show and found it to be decent. People comparing it to The Wire have lost their minds, in my opinion. That show had more merit to it than just about anything I've ever seen. Game of Thrones (at least the show) seems to be a dissection of power and how it can corrupt. That's something we've seen done a million and one times. It doesn't make it a bad show, and it's a well done production, but it's not something that excites me.

GoT and the series of books it is based on focus more on the characters that populate the world it is set in, so it is about the drama, but that is likely why HBO picked it up to begin with. It is about politics and how treacherous the game can be when people seek that power that you mentioned. There are the fantasy elements involved (dragons and magic), but they are not the focus of the books or TV series, and that makes it easier for the general audience to relate to it as a work of fiction. If you get the chance, you should try reading at least the first book of the series (called A Game of Thrones), as you could find yourself having a hard time putting it down once you start.

_________________"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."

Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:21 pm

Mark III

Assistant Director

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 5:43 pmPosts: 837

Re: The Walking Dead

Ragnarok73 wrote:

If you get the chance, you should try reading at least the first book of the series (called A Game of Thrones), as you could find yourself having a hard time putting it down once you start.

For the past year, without a single exception, any who mentioned A Game of Thrones to me had the exact same thing to say. It didn't matter what kind of readers they were, what kind of preferences they had: 100% loved that book. That kind of unanimity is unheard of. These people have diverse tastes and everything. I'm getting closer to considering thinking about weighing out the possibility of reading the book. One day, one day it will happen.

_________________"The Internet has given everybody in America a voice. For some reason, everybody decides to use that voice to bitch about movies." - Holden McNeil

Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:56 am

jnice

Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:56 pmPosts: 88

Re: The Walking Dead

Mark III wrote:

Ragnarok73 wrote:

If you get the chance, you should try reading at least the first book of the series (called A Game of Thrones), as you could find yourself having a hard time putting it down once you start.

For the past year, without a single exception, any who mentioned A Game of Thrones to me had the exact same thing to say. It didn't matter what kind of readers they were, what kind of preferences they had: 100% loved that book. That kind of unanimity is unheard of. These people have diverse tastes and everything. I'm getting closer to considering thinking about weighing out the possibility of reading the book. One day, one day it will happen.

And now it's taking over other threads! If I haven't already, I'll add my recommendation to that list. I've mentioned before I'm a casual reader, and a fan of fantasy. However, I'm usually a little impatient with long drawn out story lines and overly complex narratives. Don't know what it is about this series, but it is compulsively easy to read. I only notice after a breeze through an entire book that not a whole lot actually happened; and when I do realize this, I still eagerly await the next book. My only quibble is with book 4, as most others will acknowledge. I hope my trust in Martin to eventually make that entire book worthwhile will not be in vain.

As for The Walking Dead, I didn't read the comics either, and did find the first half of season 2 to be a bit long. The payoff was worth it, and it sounds like the producers have learned from that. The themes running through the show are worthy of some attention, but shouldn't be a complete road block in forward momentum.

Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:46 pm

Blonde Almond

Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:41 pmPosts: 505Location: The Desert

Re: The Walking Dead

jnice wrote:

The themes running through the show are worthy of some attention, but shouldn't be a complete road block in forward momentum.

Well said. This was a problem with the second season, especially the first half. There were probably two or three episodes too many, and consequently the series lost some much-needed tension. Still, I think there was plenty of material that made it worthwhile viewing, and this is coming from someone who has read the comics. Pete has made mention of the interesting dynamics in the relationship between Rick and Shane. That material was barely present in the comics, as Shane was killed off only about 5 issues in. So while there are certainly areas where the comics are better, the show has managed to make some improvements of its own in other areas. Holding the comics up as some gold standard that can't possibly be matched doesn't feel like the best way to approach this series. The show is still following the general outline of the comics, but the changes made so far have given the series its own identity and a sense of unpredictability that wouldn't be present if it had just followed the comics beat-by-beat.

With that said, the prison story arc was far and away the best element of the comics so far, and judging from the first two episodes of this third season, it looks to be the best element of the television series as well. It appears that the producers and writers have taken some of the criticisms from the last season to heart. Here's one example, from last Sunday's episode (Big spoilers and don't read it if you haven't seen it yet):

Rick killing the prisoner Tomas. In the previous seasons, this is a character who more than likely would have stuck around for several episodes, while Rick and the rest of the cast debated on what to do about him. This moment of quick, cold bloodshed signals just how much Rick's character has changed since the previous season, and it also signals that the show itself isn't going to screw around anymore.

I don't understand why anyone who places a strong emphasis on the series' relationship to the comics wouldn't at least be a little interested in how this season plays out. If the first two episodes are any indication, this season could make for some great television.

_________________"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool."Letterboxd Profile

Rick killing the prisoner Tomas. In the previous seasons, this is a character who more than likely would have stuck around for several episodes, while Rick and the rest of the cast debated on what to do about him. This moment of quick, cold bloodshed signals just how much Rick's character has changed since the previous season, and it also signals that the show itself isn't going to screw around anymore.

I don't understand why anyone who places a strong emphasis on the series' relationship to the comics wouldn't at least be a little interested in how this season plays out. If the first two episodes are any indication, this season could make for some great television.

I have to agree, this season has been wonderful so far. Two gripping and bloody episodes, great pulp fun for anyone looking for that.

I've had my moments of being fickle in the past, and can say that I have enjoyed some small/big screen adaptations of books that I've read, and disliked others. The reasons varied greatly, and are never as simple as "it wasn't like the book." Although, some of my reasons may have seemed petty. Its important to note the different mediums used in telling a story, and different ways a story must be told in order to be captivating in either medium. Even with that note, though, sometimes you just don't like it. So be it.

Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:37 pm

calvero

Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pmPosts: 1388

Re: The Walking Dead

Episode 4. Wow.

Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:18 pm

PeachyPete

Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pmPosts: 638

Re: The Walking Dead

calvero wrote:

Episode 4. Wow.

Indeed.

Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:05 pm

nitrium

Director

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pmPosts: 1470Location: New Zealand

Re: The Walking Dead

I guess ragnarok73 would have been happy with E04 . I haven't read the source material, and don't intend to, but so far Season 3 has been pretty good (on par with Season 1). Unlike most of Season 2, it has boatloads of zombies and plenty of ott gore. What more do we really expect from a show about zombies?

Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:57 pm

PeachyPete

Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pmPosts: 638

Re: The Walking Dead

Spoiler ahead that I'm not tagging because, fuck that.

I thought last night's episode did a great job of furthering the overall theme of the show - the contrast between the ways of the past/keeping your humanity with the ways of their new world/losing your humanity. Last season they explored that idea by contrasting the ideologies of Rick and Shane. It was a solid mesh of character and idea. This season, the show is aiming for a little more of a larger scale by contrasting the prison Rick's group is living in with the "town" Andrea is in. Rick's group might be living in a literal prison, but they're actually the far more successful group because they've realized the ways of the new world. They haven't completely lost their humanity because they function as a family that genuinely cares for one another. Outsiders want to be a part of their group and stay with them. They're all that's right in this new, zombie-infested world. They're also now much more willing to do what must be done to survive than they were in the first 2 seasons.

The Governor's group is basically the exact opposite. His town functions as a prison, where people come in and stay for good. They're essentially trapped there, and whether or not they know it is irrelevant. Most of them are trapped by the old ways and want some semblance society/community and crave what we'd normally refer to as a life. They want a normalcy that doesn't exist anymore, and my prediction is that will end up being their downfall in one way or another. The Governor prays off of the desires of those people, and probably genuinely thinks he's doing good by keeping the nastiness his men do hidden. But, like the ending WWF (or WWE, I guess) style scene in last night's episode showed, he's teaching them not to fear zombies.

It's pretty great writing. I have no idea if it's in line with the source material and, frankly, I don't really care.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum